At long last we have the scientific answer to what bears actually do in the woods.(at least in the USA [;)] ) I'm going to leave the discussion of wiping techniques and such to the rest of you, and simply report that I was indeed able to successfully drain an entire lake http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fADAW8sXBRc
and are now in hiding..... [:D] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > This blog post is over a year old, but my attention > was called to it by a Slate Explainer column about > the marketing of toilet paper: > > > NAD to Charmin: No Bare Bear Bottoms > P&G Must Show Some Pieces of TP on Bruin's Bums > > By Jack Neff > > Published: August 12, 2010 > > Procter & Gamble Co. must add little flecks of > cartoon toilet paper to the backsides of its > Charmin cartoon bears in future ads or risk the > wrath of arbitrators. That follows a decision > released yesterday by the National Advertising > Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. > > Acting on a challenge by rival Kimberly-Clark > Corp., the NAD found that P&G had indeed > substantiated its long-running claim of leaving > "fewer pieces behind" than the leading ultra- > rippled brand, K-C's Cottonelle. > > To support its claim, P&G relied on tests in which > tiny weights are placed atop wet toilet paper, then > dragged along a surface via a mechanical device. > This test, which shows up in online ads, showed > Cottonelle left behind "large, visible pieces" > while Charmin Ultra left no pieces behind. > > But actual people don't wipe quite like that, > pending future technological advances. So the NAD > said the test overstates Charmin's superiority and > "did not accurately reflect the results consumers > normally see and experience." Thus, P&G should no > longer show the test, NAD decided. > > And while a voiceover on the TV ad from Publicis, > New York, claims only "fewer pieces" left behind, > the cartoon bear's bottom shows no pieces > whatsoever, which the NAD found misleading. > > This case raises several disturbing questions. > First, what "results" do consumers "normally see" > in this regard? How do they see them? How exactly > did the consumer tests work? And what were the oral > arguments like? > > A K-C spokesman declined to comment, and a P&G > spokeswoman couldn't immediately be reached. > > http://adage.com/article/adages/advertising-p-g-show-pieces-charmin-bear\ s/145379/ > > http://tinyurl.com/3uxyjjj >
